Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!ncsuvx!news From: kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: Resident Applications (Was: True Multitasking) Message-ID: <1991Jan26.075758.29203@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> Date: 26 Jan 91 07:57:58 GMT References: <42149@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <672@tnc.UUCP> <42598@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <678@tnc.UUCP> Sender: news@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu (USENET News System) Organization: NCSU Computing Center Lines: 36 In <678@tnc.UUCP> m0154@tnc.UUCP (GUY GARNETT) writes: > Yes, I am talking about the same image in memory. The well defined > exception I am talking about is when pure code is made resident. > This is usually used for system level code, cli commands, and the like; > I don't think it is indended that applications programs be made > resident (can you imagine re-coding wordperfect so that it is pure, > and then making it resident? Yes, it could be done, but it sounds > like a lot of work for little benefit; better to modify it so that it > can handle more documents at once without bogging down). mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) replies: > Its primary application on the Amiga is to provide commands that start > about as fastly as running them from RAM, but don't require two copies > to be in RAM. [...] > If you have a program that's running a good percentage of the time, and > is liable to be started a large number of times, making it resident is > a good idea. Much agreement with Mike. I'm glad he answered first , because I tend to bristle at Amiga programmers who treat a 680x0 like a giant 6502; who can't handle writing reentrant code which the cpu was designed for. Unbelievable that a 68K user would want multiple copies of _any_ program code taking up extra memory. CPU/RAM dark ages! How many times have you heard: "Haha! THAT other OS requires programs with the entire kitchen sink built in, whereas on MY multitasking AMIGA I just run my favorite term program and editor in separate windows!" ?? Or talk about how proud they are of shared library code? Plus making fun of other OS's for "wasting lots of memory"? Huh! They should not take shots at other systems, and then turn a blind eye to the wastefulness of running multiple incarnations of any large and non-Pure applications on their own system... especially when it's so easy to have done it right to begin with. PS: this isn't a slam at Guy. Not his fault that CBM condoned non-reentrant code in the first place. Grrrr. :-) kevin